The popular floor model lathes (Neumann and Scully) all have straight
pivoting pickup arms for checking the test grooves while being cut in spite
of having tangentially-advancing carriages for the cutter head.
There are so many tt's out there which pivot, even though it's a compromise,
that it might be best just to let disc playback be inherently flawed,
The fidelity decreases as a disc is played back on either straight,
S-shaped, or tangential pickup arms - even optically scanned grooves, since
the cutting was done with a constant angular velocity, resulting in
The surface noises of galvanizing and pressing are quite pronounced and only
tolerable because of not being correlated to the audio.
As Al Grundy explains, the RIAA eq curve and Pop music don't shake hands
well - even if the curve is perfectly de-emphasized, since the practice of
close-miking and loud treble is incongruous with the motivation to boost the
high end (75 µs) by so much, merely to diminish surface noise. It
necessitates compatibility processing such as low corner frequencies on Low
Pass filters, acceleration limiting, and peak limiting.
If you want good sound, attend a symphony performance in a suitable hall.
(*\* On the other hand, Caruso thought the gramophone was excellent.
On 12/15/11 1:24 PM, "Michael Biel" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> As Ted Kendall finally was able to explain, the tone arm Stanton offered
> as an option was not a "straight LINE" tracking device, it was a PIVOTED
> straight arm without an S-bend. Haven't any of you seen a modern DJ
> turntable with a straight unbent arm? This is what one looks like:
> Read ALL of what I wrote in my original posting without the clipping:
> From: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Why would the straight arm be skip proof? joe salerno
>> It helps in the back-cueing that DJs do. The force is pushing
>> back on the arm, and is less likely to jump grooves during back
>> than an S-shaped arm. Unless you back-cue, you are better off with
>> S-shaped arm.
> It is a "straight" arm, not a "straight line" device.
> Mike Biel [log in to unmask]
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Straight Line Tracking was Stanton Turntable
> From: Ted Kendall <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, December 15, 2011 12:09 pm
> To: [log in to unmask]
> On 15/12/2011 16:23, Aaron Levinson wrote:
>> Based on this reasoning isn't that why the linear tracking tonearm was
>> arguably the truest playback system of all?
>> On 12/15/11 9:10 AM, Goran Finnberg wrote:
>>> Mike Biel:
>>>> Unless you back-cue, you are better off with the
>>>> S-shaped arm.
>>> The straight arm gives less wow and flutter.
>>> Also it gives less distortion as the S-shaped arm cannot be adjusted
>>> to have
>>> more than two points of distortion minima and all other places are the
>>> tracking distortion much higher.
>>> Furthermore a bent arm creates the need for anti skate adjustment.
>>> it the right channel will distort much earlier than the left channel.
>>> Also the cartridge stereo channel separation will become nonsymmetrical
>>> without anti-skate adjustment.
>>> So on...so on.
>>> Straight line is always better in all respects as it mimics the way
>>> the disk
>>> was cut.
> Of course a linear track arm is the nearest approach to the path of the
> cutter, but this is not present in the Stanton turntables under
> discussion. The point at issue is the difference between a straight
> pivoted tonearm without offset, which is a geometrical abomination only
> of use to scratchers, and a pivoted arm with the necessary offset for
> minimum tracking error, obtained in the Stanton case by use of an S
> shaped arm.
Serif Sound ♬ CD Premastering
➣ Dingbat Lacquer Sound Disc